Despite the Taftese poll showing Vice President Al Gore as a sure winner in last month's election, with 68% of the vote, George W. Bush pulled an upset and has been elected the 43rd President of the United States.
What does this mean for our country? What does this mean for our future? Most importantly, what does this mean for Alex Taft? After all, this website is horribly self-indulgent, and clearly, the reason why you're reading this edition of the Weekly Complaint is because you want to know what I think. And because this column won't be appearing in the echo, I have no editors or word counts to hold me back from giving full, comprehensive campaign analysis. So here it is, the conclusion of Taftese Election 2000 coverage:
As most of you know, I am not much of a George W. Bush fan. The Weekly Complaint is called the Weekly Complaint for a reason. The things I most complain about in this column are 1) stupid people and 2) George W. Bush. Now, whether or not those are actually two separate topics is something that is up for debate; indeed, it could be a column of its own. Tonight, most popular Complaint topic number 2 gets yet another look, as I take an insanely partisan look back at the campaign.
This analysis will be in a question-and-answer format. The questions will be about what happened on Election Night, and the answers will be what I think. And if you don't like it, suck my ass. This is my website, and I can publish whatever the shit I want. God bless America.
Question #1: What went wrong?
Now, to Bush supporters, the question would be "What went right?" But I am not a Bush supporter (unless you're talking about the thing that's not a dumb guy from Texas who will be the next free leader of the world... that kind of Bush I am a supporter of, although, not unlike Al Gore's presidential bid, it seems that my fantasies about it will never come true), so I do pose the question "What went wrong?"
Well, first of all, Americans had two shitty, shitty candidates to choose from this election year. On the right, you've got George W. Bush. Mr. Subliminable feels rather ambivamablent about killimiling peoplemeble. Then on the left, you've got Vice President Al Gore. Intelligent, well-spoken, and condescending as all shit. Remember the first debate? Every sigh that was emitted from Al Gore's mouth might as well have been him standing up on his podium, pulling down his pants to reveal a tattoo on his ass that proclaimed "I'M SMARTER THAN HIM -->"
The fact of the matter is that Gore beat himself. He went out and spoke to the American people, and in the debates displayed his extraordinary abilities to imply that other people are stupid. Bush, in response, did nothing. He did absolutely nothing. He sat there, had trouble speaking Texan, and gave that creepy-ass molester grin of his, and the public ate it up. Gore continued his condescending attitude on the campaign trail. He attacked Bush's record as Governor and Bush's plans, saying that the numbers contradicted themselves. Bush did nothing. I think we can expect to see the candidates in 2004 fighting to see who can actually do less on the campaign. I think we can expect to see President Bush sitting on a couch in his basement, wearing a wife beater, baby blue boxer shorts, black socks that come up to his knees, smoking Marlboro reds and saying, "I have so much confidence in the American people that I am sitting in the White House basement right now, watching the Cartoon Network and smoking. I'm smoking, people! I am slowly but surely giving myself lung cancer. That's how much confidence I have in you, the American voter."
It will not make sense. And he will probably win a second term.
Question #2: What about Nader?
No doubt, Al Gore would have likely won this election were it not for Ralph Nader's entry. But the people that voted for Nader didn't have to, and they tended to do so because they believed in his absolutely insane over idealism. $12 minimum wage? Sounds great! Like that shit's gonna happen! Like McDonald's would pay someone $12 an hour. You have to have a 28-year tenure at McDonald's to get $12 an hour! (Source: Hamburger University)
The Nader thing was unfortunate, but as I always say, you can't play hypothetical. They are just too painful. We have to face, the cold, hard, reality: dubya-dubya-dubya-dot-we're-fucked-dot-com.
Question #3: Are we really fucked?
No, probably not. If anything, this will make for a lot of good material in the Weekly Complaint. The problem is, I can't do a very good George W. Bush impression. I had my Al Gore down straight, and now I have to start back at square one with this dumbass. Anyway, the country is so evenly split right now that Bush will probably get very little done in the White House - he doesn't strike me as the brilliant opportunist Bill Clinton was, and he certainly isn't nearly as convincing, otherwise he would've whooped the shit out of Gore - and then we'll see what happens. I think it's very important to give Bush the benefit of the doubt. After all, he is the new president, and Republicans and Democrats alike should try and back him up, so that the country can continue its prosperity. Then again, this is the guy who probably thinks Jar-Jar Binks is the Head Guy of the USSR.
Question #4: How will this affect Taftese?
I'm glad you asked. Well, there will be four more years of columns about Bush and Dick. And probably about the President and Vice President, too. Also, if Roe vs. Wade gets overturned, Taftese will start performing illegal internet abortions. Ladies, whip out your e-coat hangers.
Question #5: How could Gore have lost Florida? Isn't Florida
just a bunch of old, medicated jews? Wouldn't it make more sense
for Gore to win there since he has a) a more comprehensive medicare
plan than Bush and b) a jewish Vice Presidential candidate?
Whoa! That's way more than one question. I don't have time for this multi-layered clap-trap. How can you possibly expect the readers to believe that the next question is really Question #6 when there were twenty, maybe fifty questions imbedded in that one clamorous explosion of language?
Question #6: Sorry.
That's not even a question. Let's get on with it, shall we?
Question #7: Are you moving to Canada?
I think it is ridiculous that some Democrats are disaproving enough of Bush to claim that they would actually move out of the country if he came into office. The simple fact of the matter is, as a nation, we should unite behind whoever is President (yes, even Dubya) in order to help them and our congresspeople make good decisions for the greater good of our country. On a completely unrelated note, I'm taking French next semester and my application is in at Medill.